BON did I miss something?

[JG1_Butzzell]

Just a question.  I have not seen anything about it so,           will BON have some new player operated tanks?

 

Maybe a Churchill, Crusader or Centurion.

Possibly a late model Sherman with the 105 howitzer mod and although it is really a 1945 tank, an M26  Pershing just for fun? as a collector edition feature?

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

No, you haven't missed anything.

 

Nothing like this has been announced.

[Voidhunger]

22 minutes ago, JG1_Butzzell said:

Just a question.  I have not seen anything about it so,           will BON have some new player operated tanks?

 

Maybe a Churchill, Crusader or Centurion.

Possibly a late model Sherman with the 105 howitzer mod and although it is really a 1945 tank, an M26  Pershing just for fun? as a collector edition feature?

BON is not TC

[Trooper117]

The tank side of things I think is a side project... if it progresses into new theatres I'd be surprised.

Like all the things that happen here, progress depends on how well an item sells... still, let's hope it has another battle eh?

[Voidhunger]

yep, lets hope!

[Gambit21]

Jason said when BoN was announced that’s he wants tanks and vehicles  - that doesn’t mean player controlled tanks and vehicles.

 

However I’m hopeful that TC continues to evolve and grow. I’d love to see an America crewed M3, Firefly etc and a small, detailed Normandy tank map.

[[KG]Destaex]

Gosh, I hope so. This is the only Tank simulator for ww2 that is not 100yrs old. I am hopeful that once it releases it will get more recognition. Right now, nobody has ever heard of it. World of Tanks or War Thunder chaps would probably come over I reckon if it gets good reviews. But for the most part we just have a few curious flight simmers crossing over at the moment I think, rather than dedicated hard core tankers. I am also hopeful that good infantry and other real world objects will make a huge point of difference over world of tanks and war thunder for tank crew. I think though that a huge coop campaign should be the focus for this products release. Those wot and wt boys are going to need something to collect to get them in. Perhaps the ability to achieve badges or add tanks to their stable as they progress. 

Personally I would buy dlc and think this game is the current king of the tanker genre.

 

I'd suggest if players are playing with clans in WT and WOT, that coop or vs missions should come ready to go out of the box with clear tank slots to fill to get the coversion rate happening. This game is the next step for those people, they are used to being in queues waiting for a game to start.

Edited August 10, 2020 by [KG]Destaex

[kroepke10]

BON is not TC. But what is BON?

[bzc3lk]

3 minutes ago, kroepke10 said:

BON is not TC. But what is BON?

https://il2sturmovik.com/store/battle-of-normandy/

[Thad]

Link: Absolutely no mention of tanks of any kind. Only the air war attached to the normandy invasion. 

[JG1_Butzzell]

S! bzc3IK

 

I think you missed a point here.

9 hours ago, kroepke10 said:

BON is not TC. But what is BON?

9 hours ago, bzc3lk said:

https://il2sturmovik.com/store/battle-of-normandy/

Look at the bars under kroepke 10's name.  Looks like he does not have any of the WW II airplane versions.  Maybe he and others ( like me, that have TC  but have no intention of getting BON) would buy BON if it had 5 or 6 new tanks. Adding the tanks would expand the market for the product? Maybe not.

[Gambit21]

BoN will not have playable tanks because that is the whole point of TANK CREW.

 

They're not going to shout themselves in the foot by offering you playable tanks outside of TC.

[SCG_judgedeath3]

20 hours ago, [KG]Destaex said:

Right now, nobody has ever heard of it. World of Tanks or War Thunder chaps would probably come over I reckon if it gets good reviews. But for the most part we just have a few curious flight simmers crossing over at the moment I think, rather than dedicated hard core tankers. I am also hopeful that good infantry and other real world objects will make a huge point of difference over world of tanks and war thunder for tank crew. I think though that a huge coop campaign should be the focus for this products release. Those wot and wt boys are going to need something to collect to get them in. Perhaps the ability to achieve badges or add tanks to their stable as they progress. 

Personally I would buy dlc and think this game is the current king of the tanker genre.

Most have heard about it when I write on the warthunder chat and ingame but tank simulator isnt something they want, and the die hard tankers whos eek historical accuracy has already pretty much either gotten the game or is waiting for the price to be lowered.

not many warthunder players are going to switch over to a hardcore tank simulator game, and making IL-2 have research tech tree is just a bad idea, thats for games that is free to play to trick players to play more, here we buy the game for 60 dollar or more and as in other tank sims I expect to be able to play any tank in scenarious I make.
The following sentences are what some warthunder friends I have said why they dont like il-2 or wont get it:
1: Too many worthless functions like turret lock, smoke fans, super details that they dont want and repairs that takes forever, they want tank battles like in warthunder on smaller maps.
2: Warthunder has prototype tanks and way more tanks, if IL-2 starts having the wonder tanks and prototype tanks like E-50, Maus, E-75, Waffenträger, E-100, IS-4, IS-5, etc then they might think about it.
3: way too epensive, max 15 dollar like most games on steam cost.
4: too few servers and players.

And what some think about playing a simulator compared to warthunder:
I think that no games can get that close to reality, and when trying to make a game so close to it, you would find many challenges that are hard to solve. Games are here to make us have fun, and a tottaly realist game doesnt exactelly means fun

 

Warthunder players arent the target for IL-2 for bad and good, as IL-2 has since 2001 always released their airplanes and games fully and sticking to historical accuracy, not adding prototypes and what if tanks like world of tanks.

 

6 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

BoN will not have playable tanks because that is the whole point of TANK CREW.

 

They're not going to shout themselves in the foot by offering you playable tanks outside of TC.

Exactly, battle of normandy expansion is a airplane expansion and has nothing in common with tank crew.

[simfan2015]

I would personally love a true autopilot version for TC like the planes have it. Then allow jumping into a certain position and play, get out and maybe, what is not possible for GB airplanes, get into another tank... Friendly or... Not. Create Air Marchal as wel as... Platoon Commander. Create a Game Mode for TC to introduce new players into it... The awkward commands, different(of course) from warbirds sure make it feel a completely separate module. It's a thin line but TC has so much potential and is visually very impressive even, imho, without new BoN content. Features like the above might make TC both easier and.... More powerful !? 

Edited August 11, 2020 by simfan2015

[LachenKrieg]

On 8/10/2020 at 4:45 PM, JG1_Butzzell said:

Just a question.  I have not seen anything about it so,           will BON have some new player operated tanks?

 

Maybe a Churchill, Crusader or Centurion.

Possibly a late model Sherman with the 105 howitzer mod and although it is really a 1945 tank, an M26  Pershing just for fun? as a collector edition feature?

Like others have already said, BON is the next iteration of their flight SIM, so I don't expect to see playable tanks there. But what we can expect for TC in the near term is the addition of AA vehicles as a purchasable add-on, and some form of infantry. But I also couldn't agree with you last point more. There is nothing stopping them from releasing collectors edition vehicles like they do on the plane side. In fact it would make a lot of sense in terms of help making TC more appealing to more people.

[LachenKrieg]

On 8/10/2020 at 6:09 PM, [KG]Destaex said:

Gosh, I hope so. This is the only Tank simulator for ww2 that is not 100yrs old. I am hopeful that once it releases it will get more recognition. Right now, nobody has ever heard of it. World of Tanks or War Thunder chaps would probably come over I reckon if it gets good reviews. But for the most part we just have a few curious flight simmers crossing over at the moment I think, rather than dedicated hard core tankers. I am also hopeful that good infantry and other real world objects will make a huge point of difference over world of tanks and war thunder for tank crew. I think though that a huge coop campaign should be the focus for this products release. Those wot and wt boys are going to need something to collect to get them in. Perhaps the ability to achieve badges or add tanks to their stable as they progress. 

Personally I would buy dlc and think this game is the current king of the tanker genre.

 

I'd suggest if players are playing with clans in WT and WOT, that coop or vs missions should come ready to go out of the box with clear tank slots to fill to get the coversion rate happening. This game is the next step for those people, they are used to being in queues waiting for a game to start.

 

23 hours ago, SCG_judgedeath3 said:

...not many warthunder players are going to switch over to a hardcore tank simulator game

1: Too many worthless functions like turret lock, smoke fans, super details that they dont want and repairs that takes forever, they want tank battles like in warthunder on smaller maps.

2: Warthunder has prototype tanks and way more tanks, if IL-2 starts having the wonder tanks and prototype tanks like E-50, Maus, E-75, Waffenträger, E-100, IS-4, IS-5, etc then they might think about it.

3: way too epensive, max 15 dollar like most games on steam cost.

4: too few servers and players.

I think you both make good points, but I wonder if there isn't more to it.

 

Its not an exact science, but compare the forum pages of Flying Circus and Tank Crew. Considering they both released relatively close together time wise, Flying Circus has twice the traffic on its forum page. Like I said, its not an exact science, but I think its fair to say that Flying Circus has a lot more users. And that is exactly what we should expect considering the community here is predominantly into flight sims.

 

But there is something else IMO that separates the two,... multi-player content. If Flying Circus is anything like its older step-brother RoF, then anyone that is into flight sims based on WWI can buy Flying Circus, download, launch, and join multi-player servers that provide an experience not far from the general experience you get in WT. In TC, you get some single player missions/campaigns to run through, and a sandbox to build your own multi-player sessions. For the people that made it to places like here, or DCS, its perfect because its what we want. But the vast majority of the gaming industry is more casual about the way they game. I would be willing to bet if you told the WT crowd that they had to design their own multi-player games, there would be a lot less interest. So the situation for Tank Crew is difficult to say the least because it is a tank sim hiding under the covers of a flight sim.  

 

But its not to say that lots of people in the WT/WoT communities wouldn't enjoy something a little more serious like TC once they tried it. The question is, how do you get them to even just try it?

 

I think IC game studios could help the situation out a lot by opening up Tank Crew a little. Currently, the two free tanks on offer are restricted to anyone with an IL-2 game. While that no doubt made sense at the start, most of the flight sim crowd here that wanted TC already have it. What might help more now is for 1C to open the two free tanks up as a download for anyone that wants to try it. They have nothing to lose and everything to gain. The working models are already there, and its not like they are still generating a massive revenue from the IL-2 community. And we already know the WT/WoT business model of get them in free now and charge them later works, so why not try the same thing with TC? It would help make the multi-player scene here more active, and draw in more potential customers for both tanks and planes.

 

Seems to me it would also address points 3 and 4 above.

Edited August 12, 2020 by LachenKrieg

[SCG_judgedeath3]

9 minutes ago, LachenKrieg said:

What might help more now is for 1C to open the two free tanks up as a download for anyone that wants to try it.

Theres some problems with that idea although its a good one:
1: these tanks are arcade like and not very simulated and plays the same as in warthunder pretty much but more keys to remember, some of my friends who tried it: went back tow arthunder as its easier and less stuff to remember and it has better graphics and more tanks and plays better to them. As you said most tank players in warthunder are causaul tankers and not seekign super detailed realism as I do.
2: These tanks have bad damage models, even after you make one explode they still keep firing at you, they would need to fix that and make them up to the same standard as the other tanks or else it pisses us simmers off and the warthunder players will find it arcadish and not better than warthunder in realism.

3: those who get those tanks for free dont understand the expansion/game will be angry as they will face tigers, panthers and kv-s and shermans that they fromw arthunder are different battle ratings and will feel its unfair and scare them away as they again dont seek historical accuracy. Myself love such things as war is uneven and not fair.
4: we need to get proper tanks ervers and get rid of tank spawning killing and the arcade like set up most user servers run with. But 1C wont do servers.....
5: those who dow ant the game are most often younger people and wont be able or as someone said: its a rip off to pay 60+ dolar for a game thats to them so unfinished. (servers being hard to find and the matches uneven in player numbers etc)

[Thad]

Salutations,

 

I fully agree with your point 4.

 

I wanted to create and run such a server that catered to tankers and limited the numbers of those pesky fighters and attack aircraft. I enjoy mission creation.

 

There is a BIG insurmountable roadblock preventing from me doing so. I have NEVER been able to host anything online. I've attempted everything. So much so, I agonize at the thought of trying again. I have simply given up.

 

But I do agree with you. 

Running along the same lines of thought. I was desiring to create a series of tank missions covering Patton's forces during the Battle Of The Bulge. I even purchased a couple of books for reference.

 

Unfortunately, the Rheinland map doesn't feature most of the towns and villages the contests took place and even Bastogne only has one road into and out of it and it was a road junction. That's why the 101st was placed there. ?

[LachenKrieg]

6 hours ago, SCG_judgedeath3 said:

Theres some problems with that idea although its a good one:
1: these tanks are arcade like and not very simulated and plays the same as in warthunder pretty much but more keys to remember, some of my friends who tried it: went back tow arthunder as its easier and less stuff to remember and it has better graphics and more tanks and plays better to them. As you said most tank players in warthunder are causaul tankers and not seekign super detailed realism as I do.
2: These tanks have bad damage models, even after you make one explode they still keep firing at you, they would need to fix that and make them up to the same standard as the other tanks or else it pisses us simmers off and the warthunder players will find it arcadish and not better than warthunder in realism.

3: those who get those tanks for free dont understand the expansion/game will be angry as they will face tigers, panthers and kv-s and shermans that they fromw arthunder are different battle ratings and will feel its unfair and scare them away as they again dont seek historical accuracy. Myself love such things as war is uneven and not fair.
4: we need to get proper tanks ervers and get rid of tank spawning killing and the arcade like set up most user servers run with. But 1C wont do servers.....
5: those who dow ant the game are most often younger people and wont be able or as someone said: its a rip off to pay 60+ dolar for a game thats to them so unfinished. (servers being hard to find and the matches uneven in player numbers etc)

Good points judge, but consider that opening up the free tanks would really just be a way to get more people into the stable for a test ride. The other thing that it would do, and maybe even more importantly, is it would allow people outside the IL-2 community to multi-crew with others that have the full version where they would be able to see all the other benefits. They wont have to worry about facing a Tiger, because they might be in one. If there is one thing that can cause a spike in sales of TC, its the Tiger model in this sim. And if growing the IL-2 community is a priority, opening up TC might be one way to do it.

 

I can't really comment on your point about the damage model because anytime I get knocked out in the PIIIL/T34, the only thing I can do is restart the mission. But if there are any issues like that, IC GS should fix it just because. But as far as being more complicated/more buttons, the two free tanks are pretty simple, driver/gunner, not too much there.

 

Personally I think the models in TC are a pretty big draw. I am currently spending a lot of time playing around in the mission editor testing the models out, and after 2 months, I am still finding things that impress me. For example, did you know that there are 4 tanks in TC where the Commander can fire his flare gun from inside the tank without unbuttoning?  Anyone joining something like WT/WoT today will pretty much have the beat down within a few hours. Every model is just like the one before, or after it.

 

Opening up TC I believe would make your last point a non-issue. Having access to the free tanks to try out would get them in without the entrance fee. After knocking around a bit in the sim, and maybe even multi-crewing in some of the full version models, $60 isn't a lot if its a game you want. I would be willing to bet the average WT/WoT player spends a lot more then that in one year.  

[SCG_judgedeath3]

On 8/13/2020 at 4:38 AM, LachenKrieg said:

Good points judge, but consider that opening up the free tanks would really just be a way to get more people into the stable for a test ride.

 

On 8/13/2020 at 4:38 AM, LachenKrieg said:

I can't really comment on your point about the damage model because anytime I get knocked out in the PIIIL/T34, the only thing I can do is restart the mission. But if there are any issues like that, IC GS should fix it just because. But as far as being more complicated/more buttons, the two free tanks are pretty simple, driver/gunner, not too much there.

IF you played a lot on the multiplayer servers you should have experienced the bugs with it: As I said at times after you knock the t-34 out and yes the player is dead, but the tank hull and the AI keeps shoting until the tank disappears, happens almost every time when we play on SCG sundays as well, and can probably find on the forum threads where its discussed. Also the damage model is far as detailed as on the T-34-76 1943 model, there the fuel tanks on the back can catch fire and small details in the damage model, the free to play barely have any and only 2 crew members when in reality and the other t-34 has 4.

Also we have the bug of if you show the tanks back and an enemy shot it there it can trigger a bug that makes your t-34 unkillable, this is a reason why many on efront server always play t-34-76 1942 model due to the damage model allows one to survive a lot more, drive faster and if you get that bug activated: you cant die although you cant move as the engine is destroyed most likely from enemy fire. Seen a lot of the soviet players always keeping their back towards the enemy.
An example in this thread, I find it funny how some players defends the bug claiming its realistic as the engine will take up the shots, when in reality a ap round will go through it as its butter and kill the crew inside as engines arent made of armour and soft aluminium/metalic parts, and even if so: after first shot the engne will be pieces and the second shot will do the trick:

On 8/13/2020 at 4:38 AM, LachenKrieg said:

I would be willing to bet the average WT/WoT player spends a lot more then that in one year.  

The average warthunder and world of tank players play for free and dont pay anything, and they often leave after 1-2 years, and those who sticks to it longer only pay once a year max. I have on warthunder 30+ people added only 2 are still playing.


I asked what you suggested to some and heres the reply and what they think about IL-2 and also note: they got the stalingrad game for 10 dollars and played around a few times before deciding its not really a game they are interested in:
 

Well firstly, I think that those poopy "free" tanks wouldn't draw in WT players. Only if they were fleshed out and free, so the standard of the rest of the tanks, then maybe it might. That being said, What I think that WT does better than IL-2 is offer more vehicles. Of course, this is something that is going to change in the future, as IL-2 will get more vehicles. However it will be the far future, seeing how long it takes to create the IL-2 tanks. Which is reasonable, as there is more work to do with all the enterior. But it still is slow. Also WT has a bit better graphics. You might say graphics are not everything, because you know all the old games and grew to like them for their virtues, but for drawing in new players, that grew up with pretty good looking games, it definitely is. Would you want to play a tank game that looked like battlezone? (the 1980 one) I doubt it. IL-2 does not need to get into photorealism, but getting a bit closer to WT level would be good. Also, the maps don't look very exciting, and if you have large open maps, you have to fill them with some life. Birds or animals could be distributed in the forest areas, and the maps definitely need more destructability. Those little wooden shacks should be able to be driven through like in WT on the kursk map. Trees should be knockable, of course not like in WT, but that seems to be worked on already. And then, because everything is closer together in WT, it increases the feeling of being part of a group, when in IL-2 you are easily lost in the vast area, there is no guidance (something maps in WT do to some extent) So to compensate, maybe the ability to have an AI squad follow you around might be good, and perhaps the ability to "ask" the other AI crewmembers to tell you where on the map you are. As estimation this could work to show a rough location on the map in case you got lost. But this might work only when you are near a road or town, if in the middle of the forest it might fail.

Yes, tank interiors might draw in tech freaks like we are, but it will not draw in MLG gamers that care about smoothness of gameplay. Yes, IL-2 might not be something for those kinds of players from the start, but there are people that might look at the tank interior one time and then find out that the gameplay is just too slow for them. So there needs to be something to compensate, as I said before.Multicrew, I totally forgot about this. This could actually a big selling factor to the game if they advance the concept more. Being able to do emotes inside the tank or point at things or something like that would be great to get over the time needed to drive to the fight. It doesn't have to be totally silly like some indie games, but just a little bit of fun, that would be good. But I for example would definitely be interested in joining a battle where every tank is fully crewed, and if not, switching positions within it should take a realistic time. So a server setting with no AI at all, even no AI crewmembers.
And yes, it would that way definitely be an encouragement for people to buy the game.
But, being a "pleb" and joining a paying owner of a tank might enourage trolls to just hop in and cause havoc because they are jealous of the tank owner. So measures need to be taken to prevent that. The tank commander could have a pistol for such cases...
With more people being drawn in, there need to be anti-griefing measures, sadly.

 

Edited August 15, 2020 by SCG_judgedeath3

[LachenKrieg]

19 hours ago, SCG_judgedeath3 said:

 

IF you played a lot on the multiplayer servers you should have experienced the bugs with it: As I said at times after you knock the t-34 out and yes the player is dead, but the tank hull and the AI keeps shoting until the tank disappears, happens almost every time when we play on SCG sundays as well, and can probably find on the forum threads where its discussed. Also the damage model is far as detailed as on the T-34-76 1943 model, there the fuel tanks on the back can catch fire and small details in the damage model, the free to play barely have any and only 2 crew members when in reality and the other t-34 has 4.

Also we have the bug of if you show the tanks back and an enemy shot it there it can trigger a bug that makes your t-34 unkillable, this is a reason why many on efront server always play t-34-76 1942 model due to the damage model allows one to survive a lot more, drive faster and if you get that bug activated: you cant die although you cant move as the engine is destroyed most likely from enemy fire. Seen a lot of the soviet players always keeping their back towards the enemy.
An example in this thread, I find it funny how some players defends the bug claiming its realistic as the engine will take up the shots, when in reality a ap round will go through it as its butter and kill the crew inside as engines arent made of armour and soft aluminium/metalic parts, and even if so: after first shot the engne will be pieces and the second shot will do the trick:

The average warthunder and world of tank players play for free and dont pay anything, and they often leave after 1-2 years, and those who sticks to it longer only pay once a year max. I have on warthunder 30+ people added only 2 are still playing.


I asked what you suggested to some and heres the reply and what they think about IL-2 and also note: they got the stalingrad game for 10 dollars and played around a few times before deciding its not really a game they are interested in:
 

Well firstly, I think that those poopy "free" tanks wouldn't draw in WT players. Only if they were fleshed out and free, so the standard of the rest of the tanks, then maybe it might. That being said, What I think that WT does better than IL-2 is offer more vehicles. Of course, this is something that is going to change in the future, as IL-2 will get more vehicles. However it will be the far future, seeing how long it takes to create the IL-2 tanks. Which is reasonable, as there is more work to do with all the enterior. But it still is slow. Also WT has a bit better graphics. You might say graphics are not everything, because you know all the old games and grew to like them for their virtues, but for drawing in new players, that grew up with pretty good looking games, it definitely is. Would you want to play a tank game that looked like battlezone? (the 1980 one) I doubt it. IL-2 does not need to get into photorealism, but getting a bit closer to WT level would be good. Also, the maps don't look very exciting, and if you have large open maps, you have to fill them with some life. Birds or animals could be distributed in the forest areas, and the maps definitely need more destructability. Those little wooden shacks should be able to be driven through like in WT on the kursk map. Trees should be knockable, of course not like in WT, but that seems to be worked on already. And then, because everything is closer together in WT, it increases the feeling of being part of a group, when in IL-2 you are easily lost in the vast area, there is no guidance (something maps in WT do to some extent) So to compensate, maybe the ability to have an AI squad follow you around might be good, and perhaps the ability to "ask" the other AI crewmembers to tell you where on the map you are. As estimation this could work to show a rough location on the map in case you got lost. But this might work only when you are near a road or town, if in the middle of the forest it might fail.

Yes, tank interiors might draw in tech freaks like we are, but it will not draw in MLG gamers that care about smoothness of gameplay. Yes, IL-2 might not be something for those kinds of players from the start, but there are people that might look at the tank interior one time and then find out that the gameplay is just too slow for them. So there needs to be something to compensate, as I said before.Multicrew, I totally forgot about this. This could actually a big selling factor to the game if they advance the concept more. Being able to do emotes inside the tank or point at things or something like that would be great to get over the time needed to drive to the fight. It doesn't have to be totally silly like some indie games, but just a little bit of fun, that would be good. But I for example would definitely be interested in joining a battle where every tank is fully crewed, and if not, switching positions within it should take a realistic time. So a server setting with no AI at all, even no AI crewmembers.
And yes, it would that way definitely be an encouragement for people to buy the game.
But, being a "pleb" and joining a paying owner of a tank might enourage trolls to just hop in and cause havoc because they are jealous of the tank owner. So measures need to be taken to prevent that. The tank commander could have a pistol for such cases...
With more people being drawn in, there need to be anti-griefing measures, sadly.

 

I'm not sure, but I am wondering if you haven't misunderstood me. I didn't say I don't believe you, I just said I can't comment because I haven't seen it myself. I have seen something similar on a multi-player map, but I'm not sure if it is the same thing you are describing. After destroying an AI KV1s in a panther, The KV1 was still firing shots at me. I was wondering if it wasn't server lag, or something like that. But like I said above, if any of the tanks have the type of issue you describe, the DEVs should fix it ASAP. This goes without even saying.

 

In terms of what the average player spends, I couldn't say for sure, but WoT was valued at about 1 billion in 2016. WT is probably considerably less. But having been there myself, what I can say for sure is that I personally knew people in the clans that I hung out with that could spend more than $100 a pop... multiple times throughout the year. Just check out the online stores for either company, 60 to 100 is what you will drop on a single premium vehicle package. Anyone that thinks either company is doing this just for the fun of it should ask themselves, how do you employ hundreds of people, rent 1000's of square feet in office space, and run international marketing campaigns without generating an income? I'm wondering if the average player that told you he plays for free, just doesn't want his wife to know about it. The other thing that seems quite obvious here is that the "get them in for free and charge them later" strategy seems to work for a number of online gaming platforms. 

 

Regarding the WT players comments, I agree on several points. I think it is a mistake not to bring the free tank models up to par with the rest of the pack. I am guessing that aside from the man-hours needed to complete the models, there may be concerns that it would cannibalize sales of the game itself. If this is the case, then it is probably nothing more then unfounded concern. Going back to WoT/WT, having a whole host of free tanks that are no less detailed then the ones you pay for doesn't seem to affect sales from the standpoint that they have both succeeded as financially viable gaming platforms. And considering that a lot of the man-hours needed to go into the PzIIIL/T34-1942 has already been done in the purchasable versions of those vehicles, you wouldn't think updating the free tanks would be that difficult. My feeling is that if 1C/777 completed the free tanks and opened them up so that everyone had access, they would notice a significant increase in sales, not a decrease. And I couldn't agree more with comments concerning graphics and furthering development of the multi-crew feature. Graphics improvements over time are important, but fleshing out the multi-crew feature is a must IMO.

 

But I don't agree with his take on whether or not people would download a free version of Tank Crew, and it appears neither does history.  

[jollyjack]

As i know nothing of WT and bought TC with a feeling of curiosity and being supportive i must say that it's quite fun.

Especially as player and the fact that you finally can see some of the nice sceneries driving around. Seen from a plane you miss a lot.

 

I tried that Cologne mission someone posted a while ago, with tanks in the City streets; not as nice  looking as the TC map, but OK enough.

With some added goodies set with the ME like trains, artillery, destructible buildings etc. it's quite enjoyable game wise.

 

Yep, BoN would need tanks, they were too important after the invasion. Churchills would be nice.

 

PS I wonder why no one on this forum ever mentioned the Atlantik Wall. The remains are all over the area where i live still, with about 90% now gone now.